The classic Political Potpourri forum is back by popular demand! ~SEPARATE REGISTRATION IS NO LONGER NEEDED; ALL REGISTERED BUZZBOARD USERS ARE WELCOME TO POST!~ Be forwarned -- this forum is NOT for the intellectually weak or those of you with thin skins. Don't come crying to me if you become the subject of ridicule. **Board Administrator reserves the right to revoke posting privileges based on my sole discretion**

Thankfully, our new AG has sent these wacko Evangelists agenda items packing. Praise the Lord Bill Schuette is gone. Let's keep extremist religous agendas out of out government. Don't want an abortion? Don't get one, but piss off if you try to push your voodoo on the rest of us.

“As Michigan’s attorney general, I will not use this office to undermine some of the most important values in our state, including those involving reproductive rights and the separation of church and state,” Nessel said in a statement about the decision.

In doing so, Nessel is already beginning to undo the impact former Attorney General Bill Schuette had in joining said cases during his eight years at the helm.

Among the eight federal cases, there are four limiting reproductive rights:

EMW Women’s Surgical Center v. Glisson: The state of Kentucky tried to close its last abortion clinic (the surgical center) alleging “technical deficiencies” in an agreement with a hospital and ambulance service. As of September 2018, a federal district court ruled in favor of the clinic to stay open.
Pre-Term Cleveland v. Himes: This case in the staunchly abortion-opposed state of Ohio is based on the very premise of a woman’s right to an abortion. Ohio abortion providers sued the state over a law that sought to ban abortions if, allegedly, the woman decided to do so based on any possible knowledge the child may have Down Syndrome (it is unclear what proof was needed to identify said knowledge). The case is otherwise ongoing.
Azar v. Garza: This case involves a minor who was eight weeks pregnant when she unlawfully crossed the border into the United States, was detained and placed in custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement, and then denied the option to have an abortion while in that custody. Now U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh sided with the government in denying the minor her requested abortion.
Planned Parenthood of Ohio v. Himes: While this case originates in Ohio, Michigan’s Republican legislators have tried to mimic it. They sought to further restrict funding to Planned Parenthood (Michigan already has a law prohibiting public funds for abortions), but former Governor Rick Snyder line-item-vetoed it. The last action on this case specifically is that it was struck down in Ohio in April.

There are also three cases violating the separation of church and state:

Freedom from Religion v. Lehigh: This case sought to end the use of a cross in the Lehigh County (Pennsylvania) seal. It also appears to test the concept of “religious liberty.”
Gaylor v. Mnuchin: This case challenges clergy housing privileges provided in U.S. Tax Code through the Internal Revenue Service.
Barker v. Conroy: Dan Barker, co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, was denied the opportunity to deliver an invocation to the U.S. House of Representatives by House Chaplain Patrick Conroy and sued over alleged discrimination. That Chaplain stepped down in May.

So instead of responding to Matt completely owning you in another similar thread in this forum, you decided to start another thread bashing Evangelists?

You still haven't stated whether or not you support killing babies who are born as a result of botched abortions. If you can't firmly state that you oppose such behavior, then you have no place lecturing others on "wacko agendas."

So instead of responding to Matt completely owning you in another similar thread in this forum, you decided to start another thread bashing Evangelists?

You still haven't stated whether or not you support killing babies who are born as a result of botched abortions. If you can't firmly state that you oppose such behavior, then you have no place lecturing others on "wacko agendas."

Just curious but how botched is botched? Is it point of no return botched? Or just ordinary botched?

I assume that by definition of the word "botched" that the baby has been born and is clinically alive. Alive is alive regardless of the degree of botchedness.

I'm sure there are some "botched" suicide attempts where the person barely survives, but is indeed clinically alive. Yet, even in those cases, the doctor and/or family can't just kill off the person. And in that instance we're talking about somebody who WANTED to die.

I assume that by definition of the word "botched" that the baby has been born and is clinically alive. Alive is alive regardless of the degree of botchedness.

I'm sure there are some "botched" suicide attempts where the person barely survives, but is indeed clinically alive. Yet, even in those cases, the doctor and/or family can't just kill off the person. And in that instance we're talking about somebody who WANTED to die.

But you can euthanize a deer that is clinically alive after it gets hit by a car... the rationale? It’s better off dead than alive...

I'll make it easy, I don't believe life begins when you think it does. I think this is a political issue to get Khristians to vote for fascists who are antichrists. Since these Khristians are suburban sheep, it seems to work.

When you look at Matt's beliefs about our government senselessly killing, exploiting the poor to benefit the rich, and hatred toward lgbtqr+ rights, its easy to understand that he is one of these suburban sheep.

I'll make it easy, I don't believe life begins when you think it does. I think this is a political issue to get Khristians to vote for fascists who are antichrists. Since these Khristians are suburban sheep, it seems to work.

When you look at Matt's beliefs about our government senselessly killing, exploiting the poor to benefit the rich, and hatred toward lgbtqr+ rights, its easy to understand that he is one of these suburban sheep.

When we have a baby hunting season come back and I'll concede the point.

That isn’t the comparison I was trying to make... the crux of the question is at what point is it more humane to pull the plug?

With the assisted suicide stuff my question would be who died and appointed anybody the presider over everybody else’s decisions about that?

These sorts of issues are how conservatives get their nanny state on... hate government power until you find something you’d like to use it for...

Don't get me wrong - there are situations where I personally believe that pulling the plug is the more humane option. The problem is that I'm not God, and on a philosophical level I don't believe man should be playing God. Remember too that the Virginia bill in question would allow for abortions literally just about up to the second of birth.....I don't know exactly when life begins, nor will I pretend to, but I think it is some point earlier than the exact moment of birth.

.. the left can never realise their dream of people swearing allegiance to all powerfull government.

I wouldn't bet on that. I think they're scarily close to accomplishing it. Trump has been the one roadblock (which is part of the reason the left hates him - because he is undoing some of the "progress" made by Obama towards them realizing their dream).
I think if Hillary had won we would have risked crossing the point of no return by the end of a 4-year term - ie, where a majority of Americans depend on government more than they do on themselves or on the private sector. Can you imagine if we got her 2 judges on the bench instead of Trump's?

I'll make it easy, I don't believe life begins when you think it does.

Since you have made some disparaging remarks about those who think differently than you I'm curious what you do think.
When do you think "life begins"?
Or to put it another way when do you think it's too late for an elective abortion?